On 07/20/2014 12:55 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > There is a *really* big > demand for UPSERT from users, not MERGE, although MERGE is certainly > useful too.
The inability to efficiently say "Add this unique-keyed row, or if a row of the same key already exists replace it atomically" is a fundamental defect in SQL its self. Vendors shouldn't need to be coming up with their own versions because the standard should really cover this - much like LIMIT and OFFSET. It's very high in the most frequently asked questions on Stack Overflow, right up there with questions about pg_hba.conf, connection issues on OS X, etc. I'd be very keen to see atomic upsert in Pg. Please Cc me on any patches / discussion, I'll be an eager tester. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
